Letter: An Example of Bias, Courtesy of Ayotte

To the Editor:

The Nov. 13 article headlined “Death Penalty Appeal to Be Heard in N.H.” discussed the death penalty appeal of convicted cop killer Michael Addison. The appeal has many facets, the most basic of which is: Did the convicted cop killer, who is black, receive disparate sentencing for killing a white police officer because of racial issues? The article reported that no one has been executed in New Hampshire since 1939 and that other death sentences since then have been commuted to life in prison.

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire ruled that Addison’s sentence must be compared with death sentences nationwide of cop killers, not just in New Hampshire.

But there was a killing by a white person of a white police officer in New Hampshire in recent years to compare it with. Unfortunately, the alleged shooter, Liko Kenney, was gunned down by a vigilante. Kelly Ayotte, then attorney general of New Hampshire, saw no infraction of the law in gunning down someone you believe to be a murderer of a policeman. Ayotte was almost certainly biased in a legal sense in letting go a murderer of a murderer of a policeman (one of her own). I stated then and I say now: Ayotte was biased in deciding not to prosecute the murderer of Kenney. A grand jury should have been convened to judge the rightness of the vigilante’s actions, not Ayotte.

It was with great satisfaction that I read that Addison’s lawyers questioned Ayotte’s decision to seek the death penalty in his case, suggesting that her judgment may have been affected by her political ambitions. I believe she has no integrity.

Matt Cardillo